IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Ntp] NTPv5 draft

Hal Murray <hmurray@megapathdsl.net> Mon, 07 December 2020 19:12 UTC

Return-Path: <hmurray@megapathdsl.net>
X-Original-To: ntp@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: ntp@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7A5B73A0596 for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 11:12:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 1.694
X-Spam-Level: *
X-Spam-Status: No, score=1.694 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FAKE_REPLY_B=0.658, HELO_DYNAMIC_IPADDR=1.951, PDS_RDNS_DYNAMIC_FP=0.001, RDNS_DYNAMIC=0.982, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NONE=0.001] autolearn=no autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 0EBPEo8NoVLh for <ntp@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 11:12:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net [64.139.1.69]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 93A7D3A04BC for <ntp@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 11:12:30 -0800 (PST)
Received: from shuksan (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8F2C940605C; Mon, 7 Dec 2020 11:12:29 -0800 (PST)
X-Mailer: exmh version 2.7.2 01/07/2005 with nmh-1.3
To: ntp@ietf.org
cc: Hal Murray <hmurray@megapathdsl.net>
From: Hal Murray <hmurray@megapathdsl.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2020 11:12:29 -0800
Message-Id: <20201207191229.8F2C940605C@ip-64-139-1-69.sjc.megapath.net>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/ntp/pD8KlQvAJZJZdG1dWVZy_4AtlMw>
Subject: Re: [Ntp] NTPv5 draft
X-BeenThere: ntp@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: <ntp.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/ntp>, <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/ntp/>
List-Post: <mailto:ntp@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ntp>, <mailto:ntp-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Dec 2020 19:12:32 -0000

> But much of that info need not be at the lowest-level time authentication
> bootstrapping since there's overlap with other areas and services (the tz
> database, for example).

I think an RFC for NTPv5 should collect things like that.  The particular one 
that sentence brings up is leap-seconds.

It's a long way from Paris to my desktop.  I don't thing an RFC has to totally 
solve that particular problem, but if it doesn't provide a good solution, it 
should have a section that describes the problem, explains what it does 
provide and what it expects some part of the environment to provide.


-- 
These are my opinions.  I hate spam.

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email